CHR-NI-2016-0001 Statement of Resource Person, Katherine Lofts have a responsibility to respect, protect, and consider their human rights obligations when taking action to address climate change.17 Included amongst States’ substantive human rights obligations is the duty to protect individuals’ rights from abuse by private actors and other third parties, including corporations.18 To this end, States also have “substantive obligations to adopt legal and institutional frameworks that protect against environmental harm that interferes with the enjoyment of human rights, including harm caused by private actors”.19 In addition to the duty to ensure the enjoyment of human rights within their national jurisdictions, States also have human rights obligations beyond their borders. The Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights set out States’ human rights obligations in this respect, affirming, inter alia, that “[a]ll States have obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights, including civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, both within their territories and extraterritorially.” 20 The Maastricht Principles also provide, at Principle 25(a)(d), that: States must adopt and enforce measures to protect economic, social and cultural rights through legal and other means, including diplomatic means, in each of the following circumstances: (a) the harm or threat of harm originates or occurs on its territory [...] (d) there is a reasonable link between the State concerned and the conduct it seeks to regulate.21 Corporations also have a responsibility to respect human rights.22 The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council in June 2011, enshrine standards for non-state actors in meeting their human rights responsibilities.23 In particular, these standards affirm that: “[b]usiness enterprises should respect human rights. This means that they should avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should address adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved.”24 This responsibility exists independently of whether States themselves fulfil their human rights obligations. 25 17 Paris Agreement, supra note 6 at Preamble. United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31 [80], UN Doc CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 (26 May 2004) at para 8. See also: OHCHR, Frequently Asked Questions About the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (New York & Geneva: United Nations, 2014) at 7 [Guiding Principles FAQ]. 19 A/HRC/25/53, supra note 6 at para 80. 20 ETO Consortium, Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Heidelberg, Germany: FIAN International, 2013) at Principle 3 [Maastricht Principles]. The Maastricht Principles do not establish new elements of human rights law; rather, they clarify extraterritorial obligations of States on the basis of existing international law. See also: Principles 4, 25(a)(d), 26, and 37. 21 Ibid at Principle 25(a)(d). 22 A/HRC/31/52, supra note 6 at para 66. 23 OHCHR, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, John Ruggie - Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (21 March 2011) [Guiding Principles]. The Guiding Principles “clarify and elaborate on the implications of relevant provisions of existing international human rights standards, some of which are legally binding on States, and provide guidance on how to put them into operation. The Guiding Principles refer to and derive from States’ existing obligations under international law” (Guiding Principles FAQ, supra note 18 at 8). 24 Guiding Principles, ibid at Principle 11. 25 Guiding Principles FAQ, supra note 18 at 7. 18 4